i recognize it is disagreeable and strongly objected to by the right honorable gentlemen and his colleagues assembled. of that, however, is in the nature of political debate and disagreement. as to when he will have a chance to pursue his disagreement with the prime minister i think that opportunity will arise air long. >> of the honorable member has got a genuine point of order he is wearing a fabulous time. whether the date of order is for quality remains to be seen. >> here on c-span2 we leave the house of, and as members move on to other business. you have been watching prime minister's question time aired live wednesdays at 7:00 eastern when parliament is in session. you can see this we session again sunday nights at 9:00 and pacific on c-span. for more information go to c-span.org and click on series

to view every program from -- out of common since october 1989 and we invite your comments about prime minister's questions via twitter in the hashtag pmq. >> at the simpson center in washington russian ambassador anatoly antonov discussed us relations and points of contention including syria, arms control, this runs an hour. >> welcome. i am brian finland, president and ceo here. i would like to think the peterson foundation for

facilitating this and many of these dialogues at stinson. this year we mark our 30th anniversary, three days of working tirelessly on issues of international security but how long we would be working on these issues and the way we work on these issues i think that sets this center apart from others here in town. ..

the ambassador and selfless had a 30 year career coincidentally, also radar mode with the foreign ministry, although be served not just as deputy foreign minister but also deputy minister to defense. he has a background take root in the strategic arms control issues, and since 2017 he has been moscow's man here in washington. it's a deep honor to welcome you to the stimson center and thank you for making the time to do this. >> very grateful. thank you very much. i would just like to say a few words. first of all, it's a very important us to be together today, taking into account the shape of russia american relations. it seems to me that it's wise to sit together, to speak to each other, trying to understand where we are and what should we do, whether we are enemies or we

are rifles. maybe we are partners, maybe friends. and let's try to understand who we are and what should we do together, how to make our world more stable, and what should we do together to increase security for the sake of the united states of america as well as for the sake of the russian federation. >> very good. that's a great segue. i think it's an understatement, of course, for anyone in the room to hear that the current state of u.s.-russian relations is under duress. but throughout the cold war with fundamental disagreements on many, many issues as well, but whether it was over strategic arms control or any of the other issues, both then and now, we continue to always talk. we entered into treaties.

we develop cooperative projects. even when politics intervened we had opportunities for scientific exchanges, for academic exchanges, for cultural exchanges. and it's really in that spirit i think that i'd like to have this discussion with you over the course of the next hour. not to ignore the disagreements that exist, whether it syria, ukraine, strategic arms control, but really do look forward instead and try to find opportunities for common cause, where as you say the united states and russia can perhaps build collaborative ties moving forward and improve their relationship. with that in mind let me take you for a little walk down memory lane. you spent the lion's share of your career working on strategic arms control issues at the foreign ministry. you spent time at the conference on disarmament in geneva. even your phd thesis was on

reducing threats around nuclear arms. let's start there. are we bumbling and stumbling our way into a new nuclear arms race? >> so you would like me to start just from this issue? [laughing] but it seems to me that i will spend with you the whole afternoon and evening. of course we have so many problems, and if you permit me i just would like to say a few words to understand where we are, and also it would give an opportunity for you to understand who i am and what kind of program i have. i would just like to say that situation of strategic stability as well as arms-control is very bad. we are in crisis. i would like to remind you that in 2002, united states had decided to withdraw from abm.

it was one of the crucial treaties between the united states and the soviet union, and maybe it would be better for me to start to make one step back. after the second world war we have been living since today without any war, just only because of -- i hope many of you know what is it, whether you like it or not but mutually assured destruction was a base for a piece for united states and for the russian federation. it is clear that if you attack the soviet union or russian federation you will get an answer. with such understanding, nobody try to be a winner. today i'm scared that some

politicians and generals in washington and maybe in other capitals, they start thinking about the possibility to be a winner in nuclear war. i would like to use this opportunity to send a message that it's impossible to win in nuclear war. we have to understand it, and with such understanding, we can discuss some issues of nuclear disarmament and arms control. so again now, abm treaty. there was a decision of the united states to withdraw from this treaty. at the time it was a lot of discussions that russia would not do anything in retaliation. you will see that 15 years has, and on the first of march my

president, mr. putin, as to inform the international community about your weapon system. i would just like to enumerate them. [inaudible] these names are very familiar for you, for those guys who is dealing with arms control. it was not our option. it which is only an attempt to find an answer to the decision of previous administrations to destroy strategic stability between the united states and the russian federation. i also would like to remind you that we made a few attempts to start cooperation with united states, to start cooperation with nato countries. i just would like to mention

that the was a set of proposals introduced by russia in 2002 when we discussed maybe you remember the position area in europe, where there were some plans to deploy antimissile capabilities. into thousands for -- in 2004, we offered new nato countries as well as united states to make a joint venture. when i said joint venture, guided missile defense. moreover, there was a very interesting russian nato summit in 2010. again, russia has introduced some ideas regarding missile-defense. >> ambassador, can ask you, from where we are now at this point looking forward, rather than back, the russian federation has proposed extending new start.

is that a viable option, do you think? >> all our proposals are still valid. they are on the table but i would like to remind you that recently it was a meeting between esther putin, are ministry of defense and mr. lavrov where my president made it clear that we are waiting signal from american side, whether america is ready, not reluctant to understand and urgency to discuss all relative issues regarding arms-control and nuclear disarmament. and he said, and even today i can urge, i mean the united states to start a decision because it is prohibited now by my president. he said that all our proposals

are on the table of negotiations. we will not try to persuade our colleagues to speed up this process. we will be waiting an answer from the american side, when and how we could start discussion on all these issues. >> i'm curious to know, ambassador, how you view the result of the recent hanoi summit. if we can turn the page and look at north korea for a moment. >> we have not yet even touch problem of arms control and disarmament, but you see that i'm in your hands, that's why i will obey your order -- >> i'm so sorry. >> i can stay here for longer periods up to you. it's up to audience whether you're ready to discuss all issues. as to hanoi, --

>> watch c-span3 this week for live coverage of key hearings. today at 10 a.m. eastern homeland security secretary kirstjen nielsen testifies before the house homeland security committee about border security. at 2:30 p.m. eastern the senate armed services committee looks at prevention and response to sexual assault in the military. on thursday at 10 a.m. eastern senate foreign relations committee hearing on u.s. venezuela relations with mark green, usaid administrator, and elliott abrams, state department special representative for venezuela. at 1:30 p.m. supreme court court associate justices samuel alito and elena kagan appear before the house financial services and general government subcommittee on the supreme court budget. watch beginning today live at 1, c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app.